W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Length of LC comment period

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:16:36 +0100
Message-ID: <4B1FA334.3050301@opera.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>


Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>> It seems pretty clear that multi-process UAs are refusing to implement
>>> the requirement. It also seems likely that more UAs will go
>>> multiprocess over time. Thus, it may not be possible to exit CR with
>>> this requirement.
>> For this case, I don't see why the spec can't just describe the expected
>> behavior and leave it to implementations to figure out how to solve the
>> issue. It seems like being algorithmically over prescriptive here will
>> lock people into certain architectures. If the prescribed behavior
>> proves to be impossible to implement during CR, then we can drop back to
>> LC and write the algorithm to solve this in prose.
>
> That's what the spec does. The expected behaviour can't be implemented
> without the performance problem for multiprocess browsers.

Ok, I'll see if I can pump out a test suite over the next month or two. 
Let me know if you have a preferred format or conventions that you would 
want me to use.

Marcos
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 13:17:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:35 GMT